William Hampton v. Federal Correctional Complex
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999622019-2]; denying other pending Motions [999655495-2], [999655487-2], [999655484-2], [999655481-2], d[999655477-2]; [999655491-2] as moot. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00464-CMH-TCB. Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: William Hampton. [15-6890]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM DOUGLAS HAMPTON,
Petitioner – Appellant,
FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX; ERIC D. WILSON, Warden;
MAURICE DANZEY, Associate Warden; L. HUMPHREY, Recreation
Supervisor; R. SPEARS, Education Supervisor; R. HUTCHINGS,
Administration; M. REYNOLDS, Director of Psychology; P.
HILLETEWORK, Mid-Level Practitioner; S. HARRIS, Legal
Administrator; A. LEWIS, Associate Warden; K. KIDDY, Unit
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00464-CMH-TCB)
September 10, 2015
October 5, 2015
Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded with instructions by unpublished per curiam
William Douglas Hampton, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
William Douglas Hampton appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his motion to present evidence.
court construed Hampton’s motion as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012)
petition and dismissed it because the relief Hampton sought was
not cognizable under § 2241.
While the district court’s legal
review of the record that Hampton was attempting to file his
rather than as a new § 2241 action.
We therefore grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, vacate the district court’s order,
and remand with instructions to strike the § 2241 action, No.
express no opinion regarding the merits of the latter case.
including his motions for declaratory judgment, for discovery,
to enjoin, to raise a judicial question, to present exhibits,
and to present government grievances.
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
See Hampton v. Fed. Corr. Complex Petersburg, No. 1:15-cv00318-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va.).
Pg: 3 of 3
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?